Też się zastanawiałem nad zamianą "starej" setki na nową, ale zrezygnowałem.
Oto, co na ten temat piszą w recenzji DPREVIEW:
Of course most potential buyers will want to know whether the lens justifies the additional cost over the highly-regarded EF 100mm F2.8 USM Macro which remains in Canon's lineup; and many existing owners of that version will also be interested to find out whether it's worth upgrading. This isn't an easy question to answer, but there's no doubt that the 'L' lens is just that bit better in almost every respect. It's clearly sharper at larger apertures (up to about F5.6), which will arguably be most beneficial to users of high resolution APS-C bodies; it's also better built, focuses faster, and of course includes image stabilization. If you want or need the very best, then it's definitely worthwhile, but the older lens is still extremely good in its own right, and for most buyers offers far better value. (The price differential to well-respected alternatives from third party lens manufacturers such as Sigma and Tamron is greater still.)
Overall, then, the EF 100mm F2.8 L IS USM Macro is an easy recommendation if you're looking for exceptional image quality regardless of price. However potential buyers do need to appreciate that the increased cost over its older stablemate appears to pay mainly for the Hybrid IS system, which despite its clever technology isn't hugely useful for actual close-distance macro work. Of course it's still a great benefit for general-purpose shooting, which mustn't be underestimated, and the new Hybrid technology appears to be a step in the right direction; but the marriage between macro and stabilization remains an uneasy one.
Pozdrówka